Im surprised people aren't taking the measures people took in Vietnam. In Vietnam, you knew what was going to happen if captured (tortueous conditions followed by death if you were lucky), so you always saved one round in your sidearm for if worse came to worse.

It's the same story in Iraq. You know that you will be executed and used for propaganda, so why not deny them the pleasure of using you for propaganda.

Anyways, if there is ANY negotiation done in this situation, it will be a US Special Forces team "negotiating" with the insurgents. Thats assuming they can find her before she is executed.

Do you even listen to yourself before you write comments?

First of all, this was a journalist, not a soldier., so I don't know why you would assume she had a gun in the first place.

Secondly, it's really easy for you to sit back in your comfortable chair and type on your computer "she should have just shot herself rather than be captured" but it's quite different when that's your decision to make. Given the fact that according to the article the majority of hostages taken have been returned, that decision would have been a rash one to take, don't you think?

sorry, when exactly did they start allowing journalists to carry weapons of any kind?

[Edited on Mar 02, 2005 2:47PM]

Who is "they"?

Most journalists in Iraq carry weapons. It would be suicidal not to.

When Mark Steyn goes there, for example, his personal rule is refuse to get into anyone's car that he doesn't know and to shoot anyone who tries to force him. I'd follow that rule myself if I were there. Wouldn't you?

Yeah, it really is easy for me to say that as an 18 year old kid in college. But it's not like I am just saying that out of the blue as some random rambling. It's a serious action that has serious consequences. I am only recommending it because it's what I learned from my time spent with Vietnem veterans (I would go to the wall with tem, and talk to them a lot).

She's in a war zone. She's not off in a field picking flowers. When you are in a potentially dangerous situation, you take steps to mitigte the risk. Carrying a gun, or having a bodyguard(s) who do is a potential way to lower your risk. The insurgents have shown they dont play by the rules. They will imprison and execute civilians for no reason at all.

And as for the comment about Journalists not being allowed to carry guns, Iraq isn't like the US. There aren't any gun laws in place right now that would realy apply to journalists. Journalists may choose to not carry though.

If I were kidnapped in Iraq, and I had a gun with only one bullet in it, and I had free use of my hands, I wouldn't shoot myself. I'd shoot one of my armed kidnappers in the face, take his weapon, and try to kill the rest of them.

It's also a good way to draw attention to yourself.

Get al oad the terrorists. She's a french left-wing journalist. You can't hardly find a bigger cheerleader for the insurgents then someone like her. This ought to go to show what they do to their friends.

Would the French gov send in GIGN? Sucks for the journalist but thats the job or rather the risk of being in a war zone. Remember Daniel Pearl. At least she is still alive.

Welcome to Counter-Strike. It's just like real life!

Tell that to Fabrizio Quattrocchi: "I'll show you how an Italian dies."

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/04/16/1081998300849.html?from=storyrhs&oneclick=true

Fuck the "insurgents."

Whatt? You'll show them - by killing yourself? When there's a better than even chance that your captors will return you? That's fucking idiocy.

Oh and you linked to a subscription-only page.